Just got access to an actual computer back, usually I would try to do this every week, but I have been relegated to just my phone recently.

Some of you guys know that I prefer drive stats over most other stats to guage offensive and defensive performance. I especially like them more than lump stats like Yards per game and points per game. A team like Buffalo may average more Yards per game and points per game, but they are actually 25th in Yards per Drive and 21st in points per drive. So they aren't playing better or more effeceint than us on offense, just that they are getting more possessions (drives).

Drive stats are more representative of what you are doing when you actually have the ball or when your opponent has the ball with no extra credit or extra cost for inflated or deflated possessions. So without further ado this is what our team is ranked right now in a variety of drive stats:

Honestly, i thought our defense would be a little bit stronger across the board, but we are near the top in the really important ones like points per drive, turnovers per drive, TDs allowed per drive, and Red Zone TDs per visit.

All in all this is good. It shows we are being mostly effecient on both sides of the ball despite our low overall number of possessions. If we keep performing at this level, we will be in good shape.

The most important stat for our offense is turnovers, period. Our fumble against Seattle screwed us over, the turnover on downs and red zone INT vs Arizona killed us, and Cam even threw an INT deep in Bufalo territory in that game. We keep working on protecting the football and everything will fall into place.

The most important stat for our offense is turnovers, period. Our fumble against Seattle screwed us over, the turnover on downs and red zone INT vs Arizona killed us, and Cam even threw an INT deep in Bufalo territory in that game. We keep working on protecting the football and everything will fall into place.

if it weren't for pooty turnovers and drops, our points per drive would be probably 3rd or 2nd. Mainly because we have the least amount of possessions in the NFL (albeit with one less game than many also)

And before people start yelling FieldGoals instead of TDs,....Carolina (30%) is still 2nd to Denver (43%)if you only look @TD drives of 80+ yds. So right now it's taking Peyton's record setting performance to hold onto that #1 spot.

I have total drive data ready also, but the reason I look at 80yd+ drives is my opinion (not yet supported by any data) is that I can try to evaluate if this offense and Schula are actually any good. Requires that your offense HAS to move the ball to score. Some teams operate well on short drives caused by their defense or special teams making plays. But isolated, they are very pedestrian. I.e. SanFran abused Greenbay's poor zone scheme in week 1 (ranked #1 @80%), but have since fallen to 16th (26%).

As for the Panthers, they are a true enigma...just like last week, they are still only 1 of 2 teams (Bengals) that scoring drive % gets worse as I included all drives. Average is an increase is 7%, Panthers at -6% (32nd in the league). Not sure if this is a Schula playcalling issue, Cam rhythm, or just some type of redzone issue. Still needs drilldown.

Will provide defensive version later.

Correlation not causation data point: Teams who have a better # of drives (than their opponent) starting better than your the 20yd line won 73% of the time. There are quite a few teams who can't score consistently if they have to drive 80yds. Undefeated Kansas City only scores 21% of the time, 26th in the league. On a "soft" schedule. On the flip side, the KC defense is only allowing only scoring drives on 12% of drives.

And before people start yelling FieldGoals instead of TDs,....Carolina (30%) is still 2nd to Denver (43%)if you only look @TD drives of 80+ yds. So right now it's taking Peyton's record setting performance to hold onto that #1 spot.

I have total drive data ready also, but the reason I look at 80yd+ drives is my opinion (not yet supported by any data) is that I can try to evaluate if this offense and Schula are actually any good. Requires that your offense HAS to move the ball to score. Some teams operate well on short drives caused by their defense or special teams making plays. But isolated, they are very pedestrian. I.e. SanFran abused Greenbay's poor zone scheme in week 1 (ranked #1 @80%), but have since fallen to 16th (26%).

As for the Panthers, they are a true enigma...just like last week, they are still only 1 of 2 teams (Bengals) that scoring drive % gets worse as I included all drives. Average is an increase is 7%, Panthers at -6% (32nd in the league). Not sure if this is a Schula playcalling issue, Cam rhythm, or just some type of redzone issue. Still needs drilldown.

Will provide defensive version later.

Correlation not causation data point: Teams who have a better # of drives (than their opponent) starting better than your the 20yd line won 73% of the time. There are quite a few teams who can't score consistently if they have to drive 80yds. Undefeated Kansas City only scores 21% of the time, 26th in the league. On a "soft" schedule. On the flip side, the KC defense is only allowing only scoring drives on 12% of drives.

Great info. But this team just doesn't make any damn sense, we're like the Mask reincarnated as a football team.

it's almost sickening that we can look like that and still have a losing record.

it points to bad situational football, which points most glaringly to coaching, which obviously then points straight to ron rivera. it takes a special level of incompetency to find ways to lose with this kind of production on the field.

it points to bad situational football, which points most glaringly to coaching, which obviously then points straight to ron rivera. it takes a special level of incompetency to find ways to lose with this kind of production on the field.

yep. game management has been his biggest problem from the beginning and, imo, handing the OC job to shula who has also been bad in the in-game decision making process in tampa and bama was just asking for more trouble.